Cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis

Abstract

The application provides an information physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis, belongs to the technical field of information physical system architecture, and constructs the relationship mode of architecture evaluation indexes, evaluation objects and evaluation methods; the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on design service scene targets and architecture attributes is used to extract the system architecture features of the information physical system architecture; the architecture features are decomposed based on the architecture feature analysis and decoupling method, the architecture evaluation index set and the system element parameter set are constructed; the system element evaluation score is determined based on the system element parameter analysis and comparison evaluation method; the comprehensive evaluation method based on the architecture logic is realized, the system architecture comprehensive evaluation score is determined, and the comprehensive evaluation of the information physical system architecture is realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of cyber-physical system architecture analysis technology, specifically to a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis. Background Technology

[0002] A cyber-physical system (CPS) is a system that integrates advanced sensing, computing, communication, and control technologies. Through the tight coupling and collaboration of physical and computing components, it enables real-time sensing, dynamic control, and information services of the physical world. With the rapid development of information technology, CPS are playing an increasingly important role in fields such as smart manufacturing, intelligent transportation, and smart grids. However, as system scale and complexity increase, effectively evaluating CPS architectures has become a technical challenge.

[0003] Traditional cyber-physical system (CPS) architecture evaluation methods often focus on single performance metrics or local optimizations, lacking a comprehensive consideration of the overall system performance and multidimensional characteristics. These methods typically fail to adequately account for the interactions and dependencies between system elements, resulting in evaluation results that may not fully reflect the system's actual performance. Furthermore, existing methods often lack precision and systematicity in handling the conversion between scenario objectives and architecture evaluation metrics, making it difficult to construct effective multi-objective architecture optimization models and thus hindering scenario-driven architecture trade-off optimization. In recent years, some scholars and engineers have attempted to develop various evaluation tools and models, such as simulation-based evaluation, model-based evaluation, and data analysis-based evaluation. These methods have achieved certain results in specific application scenarios, but their universality, flexibility, and accuracy still need improvement. Therefore, how to achieve accurate, systematic, and comprehensive evaluation of CPS architecture while ensuring effective conversion of scenario objectives, multi-objective collaborative evaluation and optimization, and scenario-driven evaluation and optimization is a pressing issue that needs to be addressed. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to provide a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method and system based on system element analysis, so as to solve at least one of the technical problems existing in the background art.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention adopts the following technical solution:

[0006] In a first aspect, the present invention provides a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, comprising:

[0007] To construct a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on the elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical system architecture;

[0008] Based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario objectives and architecture attributes, a multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method is applied to determine the system architecture features;

[0009] Based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, architectural features are decomposed to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters.

[0010] Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined;

[0011] A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture.

[0012] Secondly, the present invention provides a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis, comprising:

[0013] The module is designed to build a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on the elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical system architecture.

[0014] The extraction module is used to determine the system architecture features by applying a multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on the goals and architectural attributes of the service scenario design based on the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0015] The decomposition module is used to decompose architectural features based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, and to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters.

[0016] The determination module is used to determine the evaluation scores of system elements on various architecture evaluation indicators based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods.

[0017] The evaluation module is used for a comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture.

[0018] Thirdly, the present invention provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing computer instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implement the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect.

[0019] Fourthly, the present invention provides a computer device including a memory and a processor, wherein the processor and the memory communicate with each other, the memory stores program instructions executable by the processor, and the processor invokes the program instructions to execute the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect.

[0020] Fifthly, the present invention provides an electronic device, comprising: a processor, a memory, and a computer program; wherein the processor is connected to the memory, the computer program is stored in the memory, and when the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory to cause the electronic device to execute instructions for implementing the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in the first aspect.

[0021] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: It constructs a relationship model between architecture evaluation indicators, evaluation objects, and evaluation methods; it extracts system architecture features of cyber-physical system architecture based on a multi-dimensional feature extraction method of design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; it decomposes architecture features based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods to construct a set of architecture evaluation indicators and a set of system element parameters; it implements a system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method to determine system element evaluation scores; and it implements a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic to determine the comprehensive evaluation score of the system architecture, thus achieving a comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture.

[0022] The advantages of additional aspects of the invention will be set forth more clearly in the following description or will be learned by practice of the invention. Attached Figure Description

[0023] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention, the drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0024] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0025] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a design service scenario for architecture design as described in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0026] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the system architecture built based on the design service scenario as described in an embodiment of the present invention.

[0027] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the architecture analysis layer structure according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0028] Embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below, examples of which are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals denote the same or similar elements or elements having the same or similar functions throughout. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present invention, and should not be construed as limiting the present invention.

[0029] It will be understood by those skilled in the art that, unless otherwise defined, all terms used herein (including technical and scientific terms) have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this invention pertains.

[0030] It should also be understood that terms such as those defined in general dictionaries should be understood to have meanings consistent with their meanings in the context of the prior art, and should not be interpreted in an idealized or overly formal sense unless defined as here.

[0031] Those skilled in the art will understand that, unless specifically stated otherwise, the singular forms “a,” “an,” “the,” and “the” used herein may also include the plural forms. It should be further understood that the term “comprising” as used in this specification means the presence of the stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and / or components, but does not exclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and / or groups thereof.

[0032] In the description of this specification, references to terms such as "one embodiment," "some embodiments," "example," "specific example," or "some examples," etc., indicate that a specific feature, structure, material, or characteristic described in connection with that embodiment or example is included in at least one embodiment or example of the present invention. Furthermore, the described specific features, structures, materials, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments or examples. Without contradiction, those skilled in the art can combine and integrate the different embodiments or examples described in this specification, as well as the features of those different embodiments or examples.

[0033] To facilitate understanding of the present invention, the present invention will be further explained and described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. However, the specific embodiments do not constitute a limitation on the embodiments of the present invention.

[0034] Those skilled in the art should understand that the accompanying drawings are merely schematic diagrams of embodiments, and the components in the drawings are not necessarily essential for implementing the present invention.

[0035] This invention discloses a cyber-physical system (CPS) architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis. It designs a method for constructing a CPS architecture evaluation and analysis layer, establishing a relationship model between architecture evaluation indicators, evaluation objects, and evaluation methods. A multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on design service scenario goals and architecture attributes is designed to extract the system architecture features of the CPS architecture. An architecture feature analysis and decoupling method is designed to decompose the architecture features, constructing a set of architecture evaluation indicators and a set of system element parameters. A system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method is implemented to determine system element evaluation scores. Finally, a comprehensive evaluation method based on architecture logic is implemented to determine the comprehensive system architecture evaluation score, achieving a comprehensive evaluation of the CPS architecture.

[0036] Example 1

[0037] In this embodiment 1, a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis is first provided, including: a construction module for constructing a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; an extraction module for determining system architecture features based on cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, using a multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method; a decomposition module for decomposing architecture features based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; a determination module for determining the evaluation scores of system elements on each architecture evaluation indicator based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods; and an evaluation module for realizing a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method of architecture logic.

[0038] In this embodiment, the above-described system is used to implement a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, including the following steps: Step 1: Construct a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; Step 2: Based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, apply the architecture multi-dimensional feature extraction method to determine the system architecture features; Step 3: Based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, decompose the architecture features to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; Step 4: Based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods, determine the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator; Step 5: Based on a comprehensive evaluation method of architecture logic, realize the comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0039] In step 1, a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer is constructed based on the elements and evaluation requirements of the cyber-physical system architecture. Specifically, this includes: To evaluate the cyber-physical system architecture, an architecture evaluation and analysis layer needs to be constructed, which includes an architecture evaluation and analysis set, an architecture information database, and an architecture analysis method set. The architecture evaluation and analysis set includes an architecture feature set, an architecture evaluation index set, a system element parameter set, and evaluation and analysis structure information; the architecture information database includes design service scenarios, design system architecture, a system element database, and the relationship between element parameters; the architecture analysis method set includes architecture analysis methods and architecture evaluation methods.

[0040] In step 2, based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, a multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method is applied to determine the system architecture features, specifically including:

[0041] For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set T = {t1, t2, ..., t3}. i}, where t i This represents the i-th scenario goal of the design service scenario;

[0042] For the cyber-physical system architecture built for this design service scenario, determine the set of architectural attributes A = {a1, a2, ..., a...} j}, where a j The j-th architectural attribute represents the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0043] For a given set T and A, we can obtain a set M of target representations of the scene target under specific architectural attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is as follows:

[0044] M = T × A = {(t n a m )|n, m∈N, 1≤n≤i, 1≤m≤j}

[0045] Here, set M is the Cartesian product of set T and A, and the scene target representation m in set M is composed of ordered pairs (t, a);

[0046] For a given set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C:

[0047]

[0048] The set of multidimensional feature extraction methods is the function set F1 = {f 11 f 12 , ..., f 1l In F1, element f1 represents a specific architecture-based multidimensional feature extraction method, which can be further constrained as follows:

[0049]

[0050] Where P(M) represents the power set of set M, Let M represent any non-empty subset of set M.

[0051] In step 3, based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, the architectural features are decomposed to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters, specifically including:

[0052] Architecture feature analysis and decoupling method set is function set F2={f 21 f 22 , ..., f 2l In F2, element f2 represents a specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method. For a specific architectural feature set C, the following relationship can be established:

[0053] g1:C×F2→I,f2(c j f2) = i

[0054] g2: I×F2→P, f2(i, f2)=p

[0055] Where g1 represents the process by which architectural feature c generates one or more architectural evaluation indicators i through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method f2, denoted by the Cartesian product of set C and set F2; g2 represents the process by which architectural evaluation indicator i generates one or more system element parameters p through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method f2, denoted by the Cartesian product of set I and set F2; i is the set of architectural evaluation indicators I = {i1, i2, ..., i...} i One or more elements in}; p is the system element parameter set P = {p1, p2, ..., p} i One or more elements in}.

[0056] In step 4, based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined, specifically including:

[0057] The system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 is:

[0058] H1 = H 11 ∪H 12 ∪H 13 ={h 111 , ..., h 11i h 121 , ..., h 12 j, h 131 , ..., h 13k}

[0059] That is, the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 should at least include the system element parameter evaluation method set H. 11 Standardized evaluation score method set H 12 Evaluation and comparative analysis method set H 13 .

[0060] For a specific system element set E = {e1, e2, ..., e...} i The following relationship can be established between the system element parameter set P and the architecture evaluation index set I:

[0061]

[0062] Among them, g 31 The system element e and its corresponding system element parameter p are evaluated using a specific system element parameter evaluation method h. 11 Generate an evaluation score s for architecture evaluation metric i. ** The process uses sets E, P, I, and H. 11 The Cartesian product of g is represented by g. 32 Representative evaluation score s ** Through specific system element parameter evaluation methods h 12 Generate a standardized evaluation score s * The process, using set S ** With set H 12 The Cartesian product of g is represented by g. 33 Represents standardized assessment score s * Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods h 13 The process of generating a comparative standardized assessment score s uses a set S. * With set H 13 The Cartesian product is represented as follows, where, It is the evaluation score set S ** For system element e i Corresponding element parameter p j In evaluation index i l An evaluation score generated from this aspect. It is the standardized assessment score set S* for assessment scores The standardized results; s jkl1 It compares the standardized assessment scores in the standardized assessment score set S. The results of the comparison.

[0063] Alternatively, the above process can be summarized as follows:

[0064] g3:E×P×I×H1→S,h1(e j p k i l h1) = sjkl1

[0065] Wherein, g3 represents the process by which system element e and its corresponding system element parameter p are used to generate a definite comparative standardized evaluation score s on evaluation index i through specific system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method h1, denoted by the Cartesian product of sets E, P, I, and H1; s jkl1 It compares the standardized evaluation score set S with the system element e. j With the corresponding element parameter p k In evaluation index i l Standardized assessment scores for comparison in various aspects.

[0066] In step 5, the comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic achieves a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, specifically including:

[0067] The comprehensive evaluation methodology set H2 for cyber-physical system architecture logic is as follows:

[0068] H2=H 21 ∪H 22 ={h 211 , ..., h 21i h 221 , ..., h 22j}

[0069] That is, the comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for cyber-physical system architecture logic should at least include the architecture logic evaluation method set H. 21 With architectural comprehensive method set H 22 .

[0070] Among them, the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 It should at least include a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for set structures, H. 211 Linear structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 212 Tree-structured comprehensive evaluation method set H 213 H, a comprehensive evaluation method set for network structures 214 ,Right now:

[0071]

[0072] Standardized evaluation scores s for a given system element e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on evaluation index i. e1 With s e2 Let the element relationship be R(e1, e2), then the following relationship can be established:

[0073]

[0074] Among them, SI i (se1 s e2 Given system elements e1 and e2 and their corresponding system element parameter sets P, the standardized evaluation scores s are compared on evaluation index i. e1 With s e2 Based on the logical synthesis evaluation score derived from the architectural logic synthesis, and by traversing all elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score (SI) of the system architecture on the evaluation metrics can be obtained. i :

[0075] SI i =SI i (s e1 s e2 s e3 , ..., s en )

[0076] The logical comprehensive evaluation score set SII = {SI1, SI2, ..., SI3} on all evaluation indicators n The following relationships can be established:

[0077]

[0078] Among them, W i To evaluate the weight of indicator i in the comprehensive architecture assessment, an architecture synthesis method h is used. 22 The analysis logic comprehensively evaluates the score set SII; L is the architecture comprehensive score, representing the comprehensive score of the cyber-physical system architecture in the application scenario, and is determined by the weights W of all architecture evaluation indicators i. i Integrated evaluation score (SI) with corresponding logic i The product and sum are determined.

[0079] Example 2

[0080] Reference Figure 1 This embodiment provides a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, the specific method including:

[0081] Step S101: Construct the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer, such as... Figure 4 As shown, it specifically includes: an architecture evaluation and analysis set, an architecture information database, and an architecture analysis method set. The architecture evaluation and analysis set includes a set of architecture features, a set of architecture evaluation indicators, a set of system element parameters, and evaluation and analysis structure information; the architecture information database includes design service scenarios, design system architecture, a system element database, and the relationships between element parameters; the architecture analysis method set includes architecture analysis methods and architecture evaluation methods. (Refer to...) Figure 1 This provides content for evaluating the cyber-physical system architecture built for design service scenarios. The specific content provided is as follows:

[0082] (1) The architecture evaluation and analysis set, which is stored and displayed in a database and is based on the architecture feature extraction and analysis, consists of an architecture feature set, an architecture evaluation index set, a system element parameter set, and evaluation and analysis structure information. The architecture feature set contains architecture features and feature descriptions; the architecture evaluation index set contains architecture evaluation indicators and evaluation index descriptions; the system element parameter set contains element parameters and parameter descriptions; the evaluation and analysis structure information includes the association information between architecture features and evaluation indicators, the association information between evaluation indicators and element parameters, and the organization mode of the evaluation and analysis set. Some contents of the architecture evaluation and analysis set are shown in Table 1 below.

[0083] Table 1 contains part of the architecture evaluation and analysis set.

[0084]

[0085]

[0086] (2) Refer to Appendix Figure 2 The design service scenario is presented in an image format, including a scenario diagram, the types of elements contained in the scenario (such as roadside equipment, communication facilities, etc.), scenario functions (such as traffic flow perception, information transmission, etc.), scenario objectives (taking economy and functional applicability as examples), and scenario description.

[0087] (3) Refer to Appendix Figure 3 The system architecture based on the design service scenario is displayed in a graphical form, including the allocation relationship of scenario functions among scenario element types (such as the allocation of traffic flow perception function to roadside equipment), the logical relationship between functions (such as the information transmission function carried out by communication facilities after the traffic flow perception function of roadside facilities is running), and the architecture design description (such as the description of architecture attributes). When there are multiple architectures designed for the same design service scenario, the design pattern of the architecture should be marked (such as the central cloud architecture design pattern).

[0088] (4) The system elements are stored and displayed in a database. The scope of each type of system element is determined. Based on the determined scope of system elements, the association between system elements and element parameter sets is established, and the actual value of system elements on the parameter is determined. The content of the association between system element library and element parameter is shown in Table 2 below.

[0089] Table 2

[0090]

[0091]

[0092] (5) A set of architecture analysis methods that are expressed in mathematical formulas and implemented in the form of algorithms or programs, including architecture analysis methods and architecture evaluation methods.

[0093] Step S102: Determine system architecture characteristics. Based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes, apply the multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method to determine the system architecture characteristics, specifically including:

[0094] For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set T = {t1, t2, ..., t3}. i}, where t i This represents the i-th scenario goal of the design service scenario;

[0095] For the cyber-physical system architecture built for this design service scenario, determine the set of architectural attributes A = {a1, a2, ..., a...} j}, where a j The j-th architectural attribute represents the cyber-physical system architecture.

[0096] For a given set T and A, we can obtain a set M of target representations of the scene target under specific architectural attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is as follows:

[0097] M = T × A = {(t n a m )|n, m∈N, 1≤n≤i, 1≤m≤j}

[0098] Here, set M is the Cartesian product of set T and A, and the scene target representation m in set M is composed of ordered pairs (t, a);

[0099] For a given set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C:

[0100]

[0101] The set of multidimensional feature extraction methods is the function set F1 = {f 11 f 12 , ..., f 1l In F1, element f1 represents a specific architecture-based multidimensional feature extraction method, which can be further constrained as follows:

[0102]

[0103] Where P(M) represents the power set of set M, Let M represent any non-empty subset of set M.

[0104] Combined with appendix Figure 2 Scene targets and attachments Figure 3 The architectural attributes in the table below can be used to construct a set of target representations for scene targets under specific architectural attributes, as shown in Table 3.

[0105] Table 3. Target performance of scenario objectives under specific architectural attributes

[0106]

[0107] The application architecture multidimensional feature extraction method is used to filter the target performance and replace the ordered pairs with textual nouns to generate architecture features. The architecture features include: (economy, functionality) representing the economy of use; (economy, maintainability) representing the economy of maintenance; and (functional applicability, reliability) representing the correctness of function.

[0108] Step S103: Determine architecture evaluation metrics and system element parameters. Based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods, decompose the architecture features to determine architecture evaluation metrics and system element parameters, specifically including:

[0109] Architecture feature analysis and decoupling method set is function set F2={f 21 f 22 , ..., f 2l In F2, element f2 represents a specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method. For a specific architectural feature set C, the following relationship can be established:

[0110] g1:C×F2→I,f2(c j f2) = i

[0111] g2: I×F2→P, f2(i, f2)=p

[0112] Where g1 represents the process by which architectural feature c generates one or more architectural evaluation indicators i through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method f2, denoted by the Cartesian product of set C and set F2; g2 represents the process by which architectural evaluation indicator i generates one or more system element parameters p through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling method f2, denoted by the Cartesian product of set I and set F2; i is the set of architectural evaluation indicators I = {i1, i2, ..., i...} i One or more elements in}; p is the system element parameter set P = {p1, p2, ..., p} i One or more elements in}.

[0113] For the identified architectural features, economic, maintenance-economic, and functional correctness-based architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods are applied. Quantitative architectural evaluation indicators (system service capacity, hardware usage cost, hardware maintenance cost) associated with the architectural features are selected. Based on these evaluation indicators, system element parameters (memory, bandwidth, number of elements, etc.) related to the evaluation indicators are determined. The architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters obtained from the decoupling analysis of the architectural feature set are shown in Table 4 below.

[0114] Table 4: Decoupling Analysis of Architectural Features

[0115]

[0116] Step S104: Determine the evaluation scores of system elements on each architecture evaluation indicator. Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, determine the evaluation scores of system elements on each architecture evaluation indicator, specifically including:

[0117] The system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 is:

[0118] H1 = H 11 ∪H 12 ∪H 13 ={h 111 , ..., h 11i h 121 , ..., h 12 j, h 131 , ..., h 13k}

[0119] That is, the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method set H1 should at least include the system element parameter evaluation method set H. 11 Standardized evaluation score method set H 12 Evaluation and comparative analysis method set H 13 .

[0120] For a specific system element set E = {e1, e2, ..., e...} i The following relationship can be established between the system element parameter set P and the architecture evaluation index set I:

[0121]

[0122] Among them, g 31 The system element e and its corresponding system element parameter p are evaluated using a specific system element parameter evaluation method h. 11 Generate an evaluation score s for architecture evaluation metric i. ** The process uses sets E, P, I, and H. 11 The Cartesian product of g is represented by g. 32 Representative evaluation score s ** Through specific system element parameter evaluation methods h 12 Generate a standardized evaluation score s * The process, using set S ** With set H 12 The Cartesian product of g is represented by g. 33 Represents standardized assessment score s * Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods h 13 The process of generating a comparative standardized assessment score s uses a set S.* With set H 13 The Cartesian product is represented as follows, where, It is the evaluation score set S ** For system element e i Corresponding element parameter p j In evaluation index i l An evaluation score generated from this aspect. It is the standardized assessment score set S* for assessment scores The standardized results; s jkl1 It compares the standardized assessment scores in the standardized assessment score set S. The results of the comparison.

[0123] Alternatively, the above process can be summarized as follows:

[0124] g3:E×P×I×H1→S,h1(e j p k i l h1) = s jkl1

[0125] Wherein, g3 represents the process by which system element e and its corresponding system element parameter p are used to generate a definite comparative standardized evaluation score s on evaluation index i through specific system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method h1, denoted by the Cartesian product of sets E, P, I, and H1; s jkl1 It compares the standardized evaluation score set S with the system element e. j With the corresponding element parameter p k In evaluation index i l Standardized assessment scores for comparison in various aspects.

[0126] The selected system elements and related parameters are shown in Table 5 below.

[0127] Table 5 shows some system elements and related parameters.

[0128] Usage cost 3000 yuan / year 10,000 yuan / year Usage cost 2000 yuan / year 6000 yuan / year Maintenance costs 800 yuan / year 1200 yuan / year Maintenance costs 3000 yuan / year 6000 yuan / year processor 2 cores 8 cores Coverage 3 kilometers 0.5 km Memory 4GiB 64GiB Peak rate 1Gbps 20Gbps storage 512GB 2TB Delay 10ms <1ms bandwidth 1Gbps 10Gbps Flow density <![CDATA[0.1Tbps / Km 2 ]]> <![CDATA[10Tbps / Km 2 ]]>

[0129] The evaluation indicators are scored from 0 to 10. Higher scores indicate better performance of the relevant evaluation indicators for each system element. The scores of each system element's parameters in the evaluation indicators system service capability (a), hardware usage cost (b), and hardware maintenance cost (c) are represented by a ternary array (a, b, c). When a parameter is not scored for a particular evaluation indicator, it is indicated by "-". The standardized evaluation scores for each parameter of the system element are shown in Table 6 below.

[0130] Table 6 compares the standardized evaluation scores of some system element parameters.

[0131] Usage cost (-，8，-) (-，6，-) (-，9，-) (-，7，-) Maintenance costs (-，-，8) (-，-，7) (-，-，8) (-，-，7) processor (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Memory (6，-，-) (9，-，-) storage (6，-，-) (9，-，-) bandwidth (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Coverage (8，8，-) (6，7，-) Peak rate (6，-，-) (9，-，-) Delay (7，-，-) (8，-，-) Flow density (7，-，-) (9，-，-)

[0132] Step S105: A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, specifically including:

[0133] The comprehensive evaluation methodology set H2 for cyber-physical system architecture logic is as follows:

[0134] H2=H 21 ∪H 22 ={h 211 , ..., h 21i h 221 , ..., h 22j}

[0135] That is, the comprehensive evaluation method set H2 for cyber-physical system architecture logic should at least include the architecture logic evaluation method set H. 21 With architectural comprehensive method set H 22 .

[0136] Among them, the architecture logic evaluation method set H 21 It should at least include a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for set structures, H. 211 Linear structure comprehensive evaluation method set H 212 Tree-structured comprehensive evaluation method set H 213 H, a comprehensive evaluation method set for network structures 214 ,Right now:

[0137]

[0138] Standardized evaluation scores s for a given system element e1 and e2 and the corresponding system element parameter set P on evaluation index i. e1 With s e2 Let the element relationship be R(e1, e2), then the following relationship can be established:

[0139]

[0140] Among them, SI i (s e1 s e2 Given system elements e1 and e2 and their corresponding system element parameter sets P, the standardized evaluation scores s are compared on evaluation index i. e1 With s e2 Based on the logical synthesis evaluation score derived from the architectural logic synthesis, and by traversing all elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score (SI) of the system architecture on the evaluation metrics can be obtained. i :

[0141] SI i =SI i (s e1 se2 s e3 , ..., s en )

[0142] The logical comprehensive evaluation score set SII = {SI1, SI2, ..., SI3} on all evaluation indicators n The following relationships can be established:

[0143]

[0144] Among them, W i To evaluate the weight of indicator i in the comprehensive architecture assessment, an architecture synthesis method h is used. 22 The analysis logic comprehensively evaluates the score set SII; L is the architecture comprehensive score, representing the comprehensive score of the cyber-physical system architecture in the application scenario, and is determined by the weights W of all architecture evaluation indicators i. i Integrated evaluation score (SI) with corresponding logic i The product and sum are determined.

[0145] A comprehensive evaluation of the design architecture reveals that the central cloud architecture and the edge cloud architecture differ only in two functions and their related logic: information transmission and intersection signal simulation optimization. Therefore, the focus is on evaluating the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of the relevant system elements of the functional modules. Assuming that the edge cloud can only use general servers to implement intersection signal simulation optimization as a constraint on the system element scheme, and combining this with a comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic, the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of various architecture evaluation indicators under different schemes are shown in Table 7 below.

[0146] Table 7: Logical Comprehensive Evaluation Scores of Each System Element Solution

[0147] Option 1: Central Cloud + 4G + General Server 8.02 7.43 6.40 Option 2: Central Cloud + 5G + General Servers 9.22 7.24 7.47 Option 3: Central Cloud + 4G + High-Performance Server 9.51 4.55 0.99 Option 4: Central Cloud + 5G + High-Performance Servers 9.81 6.73 7.00 Option 5: Edge Cloud + 4G + General Server 8.68 8.24 8.00 Option 6: Edge Cloud + 5G + General Server 9.48 7.24 7.47

[0148] After obtaining the logical comprehensive evaluation scores of each scheme, different indicator weights can be selected to calculate the comprehensive architecture scores under different schemes, as shown in Table 8 below.

[0149] Table 8. Comprehensive scores of system element schemes under different weights.

[0150] Option 1: Central Cloud + 4G + General Server 7.8608 7.7016 7.6220 Option 2: Central Cloud + 5G + General Servers 8.8332 8.4464 8.2530 Option 3: Central Cloud + 4G + High-Performance Server 8.3756 7.2412 6.6740 Option 4: Central Cloud + 5G + High-Performance Servers 9.2048 8.5996 8.2970 Option 5: Edge Cloud + 4G + General Server 8.5824 8.4848 8.4360 Option 6: Edge Cloud + 5G + General Server 9.0412 8.6024 8.3830

[0151] Based on the comprehensive scores, it can be seen that when the system service capability has a high weight (such as in scenarios with high traffic volume), the central cloud architecture design mode has an advantage over the edge cloud architecture design mode. However, when the hardware usage cost and hardware maintenance cost have a high weight (such as traffic flow control in remote areas), the edge cloud architecture design mode has a greater advantage. In addition, the relevant comprehensive scores show that specific system element solutions (such as solution 3) generally do not have advantages. Therefore, they should be avoided in actual architecture design, providing optimization suggestions for the system's cyber-physical architecture design.

[0152] Example 3

[0153] This embodiment 3 provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing computer instructions. When these computer instructions are executed by a processor, they implement the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described above. This method includes: constructing a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; determining system architecture features by applying a multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; decomposing the architecture features based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; and determining the evaluation scores of system elements on each architecture evaluation indicator based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods.

[0154] A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of cyber-physical system architecture.

[0155] Example 4

[0156] This embodiment 4 provides a computer device, including a memory and a processor. The processor and the memory communicate with each other. The memory stores program instructions that can be executed by the processor. The processor calls the program instructions to execute the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described above. The method includes: constructing a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; determining system architecture features by applying a multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; decomposing the architecture features based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; determining the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods; and realizing a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method of architecture logic.

[0157] Example 5

[0158] This embodiment 5 provides an electronic device, including: a processor, a memory, and a computer program; wherein, the processor is connected to the memory, and the computer program is stored in the memory. When the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory, so that the electronic device executes instructions to implement the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described above. The method includes: constructing a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on cyber-physical system architecture elements and evaluation requirements; determining system architecture features by applying a multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario goals and architecture attributes; decomposing the architecture features based on architecture feature analysis and decoupling methods to determine architecture evaluation indicators and system element parameters; determining the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation indicator based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods; and realizing a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture based on a comprehensive evaluation method of architecture logic.

[0159] Those skilled in the art will understand that embodiments of the present invention can be provided as methods, systems, or computer program products. Therefore, the present invention can take the form of a completely hardware embodiment, a completely software embodiment, or an embodiment combining software and hardware aspects. Furthermore, the present invention can take the form of a computer program product embodied on one or more computer-usable storage media (including, but not limited to, disk storage, CD-ROM, optical storage, etc.) containing computer-usable program code.

[0160] This invention is described with reference to flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams of methods, apparatus (systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions can be provided to a processor of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, embedded processor, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, generate instructions for implementing the flowchart illustrations and / or block diagrams. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 A device that provides the functions specified in one or more boxes.

[0161] These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer-readable storage medium that can direct a computer or other programmable data processing device to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer-readable storage medium produce an article of manufacture including instruction means, which are implemented in a process Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The function specified in one or more boxes.

[0162] These computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer or other programmable data processing equipment, whereby a series of operational steps are performed to produce a computer-implemented process, thereby providing instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable equipment for implementing the process. Figure 1 One or more processes and / or boxes Figure 1 The steps of the function specified in one or more boxes.

[0163] While the specific embodiments of the present invention have been described above in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, this is not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention. Those skilled in the art should understand that, based on the technical solutions disclosed in the present invention, various modifications or variations that can be made by those skilled in the art without creative effort should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis, characterized by, include: To construct a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on the elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical system architecture; Based on the cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario objectives and architecture attributes, a multi-dimensional architecture feature extraction method is applied to determine the system architecture features; Based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, architectural features are decomposed to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters. Based on the system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation method, the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined; A comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic is used to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the architecture of cyber-physical systems, including: A comprehensive evaluation methodology for cyber-physical system architecture logic for: ； That is, a comprehensive set of evaluation methods for the architecture logic of cyber-physical systems. It should at least include a set of architectural logic evaluation methodologies. Comprehensive set of architectural methodologies ; Among them, the architecture logic evaluation methodology set It should at least include a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for set structures. A comprehensive evaluation methodology set for linear structures Tree-structured comprehensive evaluation method set A comprehensive evaluation methodology for network structures ,Right now: ； For a given system element and and the corresponding system element parameter set In evaluation indicators On the comparison of standardized assessment scores and Let the element relationship be The following relationships can be established: ； in, For a given system element and and the corresponding system element parameter set In evaluation indicators On the comparison of standardized assessment scores and Based on the logical synthesis evaluation score obtained through architectural logical synthesis, and by traversing all elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score of the system architecture on evaluation index i can be obtained. : ； A set of logically comprehensive evaluation scores for all evaluation indicators. The following relationships can be established: ； in, For evaluation indicators The weighting in the comprehensive architecture assessment is determined through the comprehensive architecture methodology. Analysis of logical comprehensive evaluation score set Sure; The overall architecture score represents the comprehensive score of the cyber-physical system architecture in the application scenario, based on all architecture evaluation metrics. weight Comprehensive evaluation score based on corresponding logic The product and sum are determined.

2. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that, A cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer is constructed, including: an architecture evaluation and analysis set, an architecture information database, and an architecture analysis method set; the architecture evaluation and analysis set includes an architecture feature set, an architecture evaluation index set, a system element parameter set, and evaluation and analysis structure information; the architecture information database includes design service scenarios, design system architecture, a system element database, and the relationship between element parameters; the architecture analysis method set includes architecture analysis methods and architecture evaluation methods.

3. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the service scenario objectives and architectural attributes of cyber-physical system architecture design, a multi-dimensional architectural feature extraction method is applied to determine the system architecture features, including: For a given cyber-physical system architecture design service scenario, determine the scenario target set. ,in, The first one representing this design service scenario One scenario target; For the cyber-physical system architecture built for this design service scenario, determine the set of architecture attributes. ,in, The first representing the cyber-physical system architecture One architectural attribute; For a given set T and A, we can obtain a set M of target representations of the scene target under specific architectural attributes. The relationship between set M and sets T and A is as follows: ； Here, set M is the Cartesian product of sets T and A, and the elements in set M represent the scene target representation. From ordered pairs constitute; For a given set M, specific architectural features c can be extracted to form an architectural feature set C: ； The architecture of multidimensional feature extraction methods is a function set , medium elements For a specific architecture-based multidimensional feature extraction method, this relationship is further constrained as follows: ； ； in, Describes the power set of set M. Let M represent any non-empty subset of set M.

4. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, architectural features are decomposed to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters, including: Architecture feature analysis and decoupling method set is a function set , medium elements For specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, the following relationship can be established for a specific architectural feature set C: ； ； in, Representative architectural features Through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods Generate one or more architecture evaluation metrics The process, using sets With sets The Cartesian product is represented by; Representative architecture evaluation metrics Through specific architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods Generate one or more system element parameters The process, using sets With sets The Cartesian product is represented by; It is a set of architecture evaluation metrics One or more elements in; It is a set of system element parameters One or more elements in.

5. The cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods, the evaluation scores of system elements in each architecture evaluation index are determined, including: System Element Parameter Analysis and Comparative Evaluation Methodology Set for: ； That is, a set of system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods. It should at least include a set of system element parameter evaluation methods. Standardized assessment score method set Evaluation and comparative analysis method set ; For a specific set of system elements and the corresponding system element parameter set P and architecture evaluation index set Establish the following relationship: ； ； ； in, Representative system elements With the corresponding system element parameters Evaluation methods based on specific system element parameters Generate an architecture-oriented evaluation metric Assessment score The process, using sets ,gather ,gather With sets The Cartesian product is represented by; Representative assessment score Evaluation methods based on specific system element parameters Generate a standardized assessment score The process, using sets With sets The Cartesian product is represented by; Represents standardized assessment score Through specific evaluation and comparative analysis methods Generate a comparative standardized assessment score The process, using sets With sets The Cartesian product is represented as follows, where, It is an evaluation score set China targets system elements Corresponding element parameters In evaluation indicators An evaluation score generated from this aspect. It is a standardized set of assessment scores China's assessment scores The standardization results; It is a comparison of standardized assessment score sets China's standardized assessment scores The results of the comparison.

6. A cyber-physical system architecture evaluation system based on system element analysis, characterized in that, include: The module is designed to build a cyber-physical system architecture evaluation and analysis layer based on the elements and evaluation requirements of cyber-physical system architecture. The extraction module is used to determine the system architecture features by applying a multi-dimensional feature extraction method based on the goals and architectural attributes of the service scenario design based on the cyber-physical system architecture. The decomposition module is used to decompose architectural features based on architectural feature analysis and decoupling methods, and to determine architectural evaluation indicators and system element parameters. The determination module is used to determine the evaluation scores of system elements on various architecture evaluation indicators based on system element parameter analysis and comparative evaluation methods. The evaluation module is used for a comprehensive evaluation method based on architectural logic to achieve a comprehensive evaluation of the cyber-physical system architecture, including: A comprehensive evaluation methodology for cyber-physical system architecture logic for: ； That is, a comprehensive set of evaluation methods for the architecture logic of cyber-physical systems. It should at least include a set of architectural logic evaluation methodologies. Comprehensive set of architectural methodologies ; Among them, the architecture logic evaluation methodology set It should at least include a set of comprehensive evaluation methods for set structures. A comprehensive evaluation methodology set for linear structures Tree-structured comprehensive evaluation method set A comprehensive evaluation methodology for network structures ,Right now: ； For a given system element and and the corresponding system element parameter set In evaluation indicators On the comparison of standardized assessment scores and Let the element relationship be The following relationships can be established: ； in, For a given system element and and the corresponding system element parameter set In evaluation indicators On the comparison of standardized assessment scores and Based on the logical synthesis evaluation score obtained through architectural logical synthesis, and by traversing all elements of the system, the logical synthesis evaluation score of the system architecture on evaluation index i can be obtained. : ； A set of logically comprehensive evaluation scores for all evaluation indicators. The following relationships can be established: ； in, For evaluation indicators The weighting in the comprehensive architecture assessment is determined through the comprehensive architecture methodology. Analysis of logical comprehensive evaluation score set Sure; The overall architecture score represents the comprehensive score of the cyber-physical system architecture in the application scenario, based on all architecture evaluation metrics. weight Comprehensive evaluation score based on corresponding logic The product and sum are determined.

7. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is used to store computer instructions, which, when executed by a processor, implement the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1-5.

8. A computer device, characterized in that, The system includes a memory and a processor, the processor and the memory communicating with each other, the memory storing program instructions that can be executed by the processor, and the processor calling the program instructions to execute the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1-5.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, include: The device includes a processor, a memory, and a computer program; wherein the processor is connected to the memory, the computer program is stored in the memory, and when the electronic device is running, the processor executes the computer program stored in the memory to cause the electronic device to execute instructions that implement the cyber-physical system architecture evaluation method based on system element analysis as described in any one of claims 1-5.

Images